Excellent article that answers the most common questions about the Azov Regiment.
The main thought, in my opinion, is contained in this paragraph (but I still recommend reading the entire article):
So, if everything is so obvious, why does the Western audience continue to express concern about Azov?
There are three answers to this question.
First of all, the far-right and in some cases neo-Nazi background of some of the founders of Azov is true. This was partly reflected in the emblem of Azov. But this was not reflected in Azov's activities in any way. For example, in Mariupol there was a fairly large Jewish community, there was a synagogue functioning, which in eight years has never encountered any problems with any Azov fighter.
The similar situation is with Muslims in the city or a large (about 100,000) Greek community. The greatest danger for the ethnic communities of Mariupol, as well as for all the residents of the city, is the indiscriminate use of heavy weapons on civilian infrastructure by Russian aggressors. But the fact that Andriy Biletsky, the founder of Azov, continued to exploit the regiment's name for years in creating new political projects of nationalist orientations, additionally confused the outside observer.